Author Archives: Robert Ross
The Attorney’s Duty to Acquire Learning and Skill
HOW MUCH LEARNING AND SKILL MUST A LAWYER POSSESS? A lawyer must always possess at least minimum competence to handle a client’s matters or issues. No lawyer should take on a case that he or she is incompetent to represent, either in terms of education or in terms of skills. However, clients should be… Read More »
How Much Professional Skill Does a Lawyer Need?
Lawyers have a duty to maintain a reasonable level of learning and skill. By law, a lawyer must possess and apply a reasonable level of learning and skill, as necessary to handle the legal matters the lawyer undertakes. The expected level of learning and skill includes: 1. The skill to determine the type or nature of… Read More »
Conspiracy, Illegal Interference, and other Claims Against Lawyers
In addition to malpractice (professional negligence), breach of fiduciary duty, and other intentional torts, attorneys may be held liable (and sued) for a variety of legally wrongful actions which damage current or former clients (and, occasionally, third parties). Let’s take a look at a few of these: CIVIL CONSPIRACY (WITH A CLIENT) Lawyers may… Read More »
Attorneys’ Liability for Fraud & Intentional Torts
In addition to legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, and contract-related legal claims, attorneys may also be held liable for intentional torts committed in the course of law practice (and otherwise). WHAT IS A TORT? A “tort” is a “civil wrong” — meaning an action which the law prohibits but which is actionable in… Read More »
Lawyers and Breach of Fiduciary Duty
In addition to malpractice (professional negligence) lawyers can be held liable to clients for “breach of fiduciary duty,” which is a separate (but often related) cause of action. The elements of the action for breach of fiduciary duty are: 1. The lawyer must owe (or have owed) a fiduciary duty to the plaintiff. 2. The… Read More »
More Defenses to Legal Malpractice Suits
In the law, a “defense” is a fact or situation which may reduce or eliminate a defendant’s liability for allegedly wrongful conduct. Defenses exist to most causes of action, and legal malpractice is no exception. Today, we take a look at some additional defenses which a defendant attorney may claim or attempt to rely… Read More »
Defenses to Malpractice Claims (part 1)
When a plaintiff claims a lawyer’s actions constitute malpractice, the defendant attorney has the right to assert certain legally-recognized defenses. If proven, these defenses may provide partial or complete justification for the attorney’s actions and/or reduce the amount of damages available to the plaintiff if the malpractice claim prevails. This week, we’ll take a… Read More »
When Has a Plaintiff Suffered “Actual Injury” to Trigger the Statute of Limitations on Legal Malpractice?
In Monday’s post, we discussed “tolling” of the statute of limitations on legal malpractice actions. In the legal malpractice context, the “statute of limitations” refers to the time within which a plaintiff must commence a legal action against the defendant attorney. Under some circumstances, this limitations period is “tolled,” or suspended, until a specified… Read More »
Tolling the Statute of Limitations on Legal Malpractice Claims
As we discussed last week, the “statute of limitations” is a law that provides a limitation period for the commencement of malpractice claims. Claims must be filed within the period stated in the law (or fall within an exception) or the plaintiff cannot recover. For this reason, it’s critical that plaintiffs must not delay in… Read More »
Don’t Delay and Lose Your Rights: the Statute of Limitations on Legal Malpractice
WHAT IS A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS (And why should you care)? A “statute of limitations” is a law (a “statute”) which establishes the amount of time a plaintiff has to file a lawsuit in a specific type of case. Different types of claims have different “limitation periods,” though many California statutes of limitations specify 1-3… Read More »
